Talk:Submerged floating tunnel

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bridges and Tunnels, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of bridges and tunnels on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Bridges and TunnelsWikipedia:WikiProject Bridges and TunnelsTemplate:WikiProject Bridges and TunnelsBridge and Tunnel articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Civil engineering High‑importance

	Engineering portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Civil engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Civil engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Civil engineeringWikipedia:WikiProject Civil engineeringTemplate:WikiProject Civil engineeringCE articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Technology

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles

Untitled

Added diagram Yupi666 21:44, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

change name

I think this article should be moved to submerged floating tunnel. It is a much more self-explaining name, it is not linked to a particular entity proposing to build one (in this case the Ponte de Archimede sino-italian consortium) and the concept is much more referred as "Submerged floating tunnel" (1,310 results) than as "Archimedes bridge" (681 results). Waldir ^talk 00:54, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can it survive a collapse?

A very important point must be mentioned in this article: What happens to such a tunnel if it is filled with water - e.g. after a (terrorist) bomb explosion? Are they designed to stay in place, hanging in pillars or under floaters? Or will they sink to the bottom? And if so: Will they become destroyed? Designing them for a certain vehicle weight is meaningless, as this will certainly be less than the weight of water inside. OlavN (talk) 13:25, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since none have been built yet, some guessing is necessary. One of the methods of transporting the sections is to seal them and tow them through the water. I imagine they would leave in place some method for individual sections to be sealed, to prevent the water from spreading. The damaged section may have to be ejected to prevent it from dragging the rest down, or putting too much strain on the connections. They could attach to the exterior of each section enough inflatable floats (like an instant emergency raft, fills up quickly) to overcome the weight of the section without water (being filled with water won't affect the weight until it's above the surface).

So, probably four systems involved here - emergency hatches, section release from other sections, section release from the supporting cables, and emergency floats. Also is worth mentioning that, for seafloor-anchored tunnels, the end of the cable near the tunnel would have a float on it, so that it would not be lost. 184.166.6.102 (talk) 12:55, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To Do: Advantages and disadvantages

Sections for advantages and disadvantages would be nice, but of course require research and citation. 184.166.6.102 (talk) 13:26, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Potential Advantages:

Cheaper construction (being able to mass produce tunnel sections at a dedicated facility beats drilling through rock)
Faster construction (many sections can be built at the same time)
Cheaper and faster repair (spare tunnel sections can be kept on-site, and replacing a single section involves much less work than repairing an underground tunnel would)
More resistant to geological activity
Can be used in places too deep to be drilled, or otherwise unsuited for tunnels
Cheaper expansion than drilled tunnels (if sections had expansion taken into account during construction, and the supporting/tethering lines were strong enough, you could unhook the tether, connect the new section next to the existing section, and connect the tether to the new section)

Potential Disadvantages:

Vulnerable to icebergs, submarines, ship anchors, wildlife, potentially tides/tsunamis
Very vulnerable to attack
May not be usable in very high current locations
Temperature control may be an issue since the entire tunnel is directly exposed to water (apparently the Chunnel got up to 130 degrees when running trains through it, so it may be an issue more of constant heating and cooling than keeping the tunnel warm enough)

Agree. This section should be added, but with external citations rather than our speculations. DKEdwards (talk) 18:53, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Submerged floating tunnel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080110010210/http://www.nsft.no:80/ to http://www.nsft.no

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:29, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on Submerged floating tunnel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:04, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]